About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)
give the world some indication of how russia, china, the u.s., and essentially all major nations of the world to view the threat of a nuclear >> thank you, senator, for being here. and thank you for your military service. my single biggest concern about the nomination is the dramatic flip-flops between your past statements and record and what you are saying as a nominee. and they are about key, core issues. we have discussed some of those today. i want to focus on that, and i apologize if i go over some of the things that have come up before. i could not be here for most of the hearing. in 2006, when israel was responding to attacks by hezbollah from lebanon, you call that response, "a sickening slaughter." and you accuse israel of "the systematic destruction of an american friend, the people of and country of lebanon." what do you say about those statements?>> well, first, i said them. i have been asked about them. i have said that i regret saying that. it was within the larger context of a speech i made about what was going on, a thirtysomething days of war going on. i also inc
getting a nuclear weapon. at the same time, we will engage russia to -- our ability to influence others depends on our willingness to lead and meet our obligations. america must also face the rapidly growing threat from cyber attacks. now, we know that hackers steal people's identities and infiltrate private e-mails. we know foreign countries and companies swiped our core in -- swiped our secrets. now we must protect our -- we cannot look back years from now and wonder why we did nothing in the face of real threats to our security and economy. that is why earlier today i signed a new executive order that will strengthen our cyber defenses by increasing information sharing and developing standards to protect our national security, our jobs, and our privacy. [applause] but now congress must act as well, by passing legislation to give our government the greater capacity to secure our networks and to deter attacks. this is something that we should be able to get done on a bipartisan basis. even as we protect our people, we should remember that today's world events, not just dangerous, not j
spokesman will have to stand up after russia has used a drone against a dissident in the next country. the state department will have to explain why that was a bad drone strike in comparison to the united states that only conducts good and lawful drone strikes. that isn't working for our government -- that is important for our government to lay down as precisely clear roles for the use of drones. >> is it the case that if russia or china or someone were doing what mr. cole posits, we would condemn that out of hand? we would not say this trend strike was ok and that one was not. >> if russia or china were being attacked by a terrorist group that was indisputably producing -- posing imminent threat. >> the chechens attacked them at one point. >> if they were in another country posing imminent threats to russia and the country they were in was unable to prevent that threat, i think we would have to acknowledge rushers right to defend itself. >> mr. bellinger and said we need to process. not judicial process. i do not understand how the determination by an executive branch official withou
of for iran but may be more for russia, which seems to be at least aware of the fact that they -- assad, might have a short half-life is to move over the other side of the fence with brahimi. on our side, this is not a popular view, but to join in with preconditions to negotiations and drop them all, there's no good negotiation, in my view, that starts with the other side requiring it to give up as a consequence. that is not realistic. i do not know why we jump on that? it may have been seen as the one element necessary to keep the syrian obligation together what we tried to move in the other direction, but now that he has made his point of view, we have something of an open door. i would verily like to see, and i do not think the iranians would support it come about the humanitarian cease-fire based on the commitments in negotiations. i also have my own doubts as to whether a transitional government makes so much sense and whether we ought not to arrive to elections. the syrian election commission and the u.n. election commission might be a better way. we can argue for a year and a half about
russia and the united states. it's not true any more. our intelligence has told us since 2007 that iran will have that nuclear capability and a delivery system by 2015. so it's other countries that are involved in that. the question i would ask you, in your book you wrote that we must once again convince the world that america has a clear intention of fulfilling the nuclear disarmament committee -- commitments that we have made. the question, a bit more recently you said, i believe providing necessary resources for a nuclear modernization of the triad should be a national priority. do you stand by your last statement? >> my last -- >> your last statement saying -- i believe that providing the necessary resources for nuclear modernization of the triad should be a national priority? >> absolutely should be. i agree with that. and that's what the policy of this administration is. >> well, i'm merely bringing out the inconsistency because when you were involved with supporting the global zero or whatever that group, the organization was, their declaration is, quote, we the undersigned belie
is that it is incurring in certain countries. we were in russia three years ago. i said there was so much fraud going on. there was not enough cooperation going on between the russian authorities and those of us in the industry trying to fight fraud. since then, they are participating. governments understand there are certain hotspo for most internet fraud. the government are now . we put over 60 people in jail in romania who were internet fraudsters. alternately, i think that process will continue. -- ultimately, i think that process wi continue. >> there are many competitors abroad. how much of your focus is moving overseas? >> ebay is global. 60% of the revenue is outside the u.s. paypal is 50% outside of the u.s. 25% is cross-border. they're both very global entities. we are continuing to expand globally. there are 2 billion internet users. that'll be 4 billion in the next few years. look at where th growth will be. 80% will be in emerging markets. people accessing the w for the first time in their lives. it can be done through a phone or a laptop. we see enormous growth opportunity. we are growing
powers like russia and india, who are playing very interesting roles in the evolving discussions over iran. welcome. and along with time we have our own kenneth pollack, senior fellow in the center, and ken is finishing a book right now on the challenge of iran, which you will be able to look for in book stores later this year. we're happy to have ken with us to provide comments on this topic as well. what we will do is we will have a bit of a conversation up here, and then we will open it up for questions from the floor. why don't we jump right in with some of these recent developments. there is now a date set for the next round of international negotiations to be held in a distinguished diplomatic capital of almaty. one wonders if that quieter location will allow distance from the glare of the cameras. what do you expect from these long-awaited talks? >> thank you very much. it is a pleasure to be here. i cannot think of a more bountiful crop to bring in out of the rain, for what has been the longest-running non-defense discussion about iran in this town for some time. i wish i coul
not only changed the middle east, but it will change china. it would change russia. and it has changed our lives. i cannot tell you the changes. we had this conversation a little over two years ago. mubarak is in power. gaddafi is in power. there is no uprising in syria. what you think the world is going to be like two to three years from now? not only is senator klobuchar one the hardest working members of the senate, she is one of the most pleasant to be around. she takes my insults and other barbs with a great deal of good humor, and i enjoy being with her. >> the term mccain standing up like this on immigration is going to make all the difference. we are excited about what is going on. whenever you travel with him as a woman in the foreign country, and, and it is all guys in power, he makes sure he says this woman is a senator of the state of minnesota. he is a great guy. >> ladies and gentleman, a quick word about john mccain. we are talking today about how immigration. over the years, i have seen senator mccain talk about -- detail. i have been with him when he was steaming on campai
, we will engage russia to seek further reductions in our nuclear arsenals, and continue leading the global effort to secure nuclear materials that could fall into the wrong hands -- because our ability to influence others depends on our willingness to lead. america must also face the rapidly growing threat from cyber-attacks. we know hackers steal people's identities and infiltrate private e-mail. we know foreign countries and companies swipe our corporate secrets. now our enemies are also seeking the ability to sabotage our power grid, our financial institutions, and our air traffic control systems. we cannot look back years from now and wonder why we did nothing in the face of real threats to our security and our economy. that's why, earlier today, i signed a new executive order that will strengthen our cyber defenses by increasing information sharing, and developing standards to protect our national security, our jobs, and our privacy. now, congress must act as well, by passing legislation to give our government a greater capacity to secure our networks and deter attacks. eve
the statutory rate. i agree. you have a target rate in mind russia mark i know a lot of us -- do you have a target rate in mind? i know a lot of us have talked about 25%. >> we do not have the ability to lose revenue as we go through business tax reform. i think it is challenging to get all the way to 25%, but the more aggressive we are in broadening the base, the more progress we will be able to make. >> do you agree, on the corporate side, we should be revenue neutral? my understanding that in the past we focus on the corporate rate being revenue neutral. >> i think the important thing is to have the tax code be simplified and consistent with a more robust investment retirement -- investment environment. i think it can be done in a revenue neutral way. i do not believe we have the ability to raise the revenue we need to deal with the fiscal problem and have it cost revenue in tax reform. >> many have made the argument that we need to pay close attention to the individual code with regard to its impact on business taxation. do you think we can do corporate reform without doing -- without
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (31 Dec 2014)